LOL, I’m the last person that will apologize for what the yahoo’s in government do.

I can see that. Good luck with your business. I operated a business in NYC and spent hundreds of hours and plenty of legal fees complying with federal, state and local regulations. I wish there were fewer. Smoking was prohibited in our office because of state law. Of all the laws we had to comply with, that wasn’t the toughest since the majority of our employees would have objected anyway to someone smoking in a conference room or shared cubicle space. While smoking in the workplace was prohibited we hired plenty of smokers who would smoke outside the building or in a park across the street.

The funniest and most irritating compliance issue I had to deal with was the California non-harassment course that restricted what you could say to an employee based on sex, race, age, etc. You really had to filter your language and pretty much avoid all jokes.

Your idea that a “private” business gets to do whatever it wants would disallow the ADA.

The ADA is a federal law and not a city ordinance and I must agree your right it does cost to refurb a building to comply to the ADA. I don’t think that a business should be able to do what ever it want’s. That’s why law’s and ordinances are put in place, they are for those with no scruples or moral’s or concern for the public health and welfare. The fact that a business owner being forced to allow absolutley no smoking in their establishment is not fair to anyone especially smokers. It’s kind of like saying no one of Middle Eastern Decent are allowed to drive taxi’s or own convenience stores, your excluding and penalizing one demographic solely because who they are. Equal right’s under the law.

Why not let the market decide? Someone with a good business idea might want to run it from their home rather than pay rent in the commercial district?

The market should decide what it want’s and the vote in this city for this has came before the voter’s before and failed, business owner’s started putting in seperate area’s for smoker’s and non-smoker’s. The city in my opinion should grant tax incentives to those who comply with a request from the city, then it would come down to the business owner’s bottom line. Money is a great motivator.

Someone with a good business idea might want to run it from their home rather than pay rent in the commercial district?

As I do 5 day’s a week my city government does not disallow me to have a home based business I just have to have the license to operate and pay my taxes. I have a friend that conduct’s his automotive repair shop at his home 3 bay’s and 2 lift’s and the city say’s nothing to him as long as he has his license and pay’s his taxes and another one that makes furniture and does wood carving from his home. I painted our logo’s on my studio and their shop’s, no phone #’s due to city ordinance but that really has’nt hurt any of us we all have our vehicles with our logo’s and info on them and all of us have people that have seen our vehicles and will walk up to our house’s or some that are curious and come up and ask what we do, we’ve all gained some customer’s that way.
My point is this should not be a win for one and loss for another, I’t should become a win win for everyone involved.

Maybe you are already apologizing for government behavior that has put us on the slippery slope.

LOL, I’m the last person that will apologize for what the yahoo’s in government do.

The point is it’s not a public business, it’s private

The Americans with Disabilities Act affects private businesses. It can force a small business to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars putting in ramps and new bathrooms even if they know they don’t have any customers in wheel chairs. Your idea that a “private” business gets to do whatever it wants would disallow the ADA. Why should the government get to tell a private owner what to do?

zoning ordinances that is beneficial to business’s

You are going to rely on the government to tell you what is beneficial to business? Why not let the market decide? Someone with a good business idea might want to run it from their home rather than pay rent in the commercial district? Why does the government get to decide where you conduct your business and satisfy your customers?

Maybe you are already apologizing for government behavior that has put us on the slippery slope.

From your arguments it sounds like you’d oppose the Americans with Disabilities Act as well.

Don’t be absurd that law was passed for the disabled to have equal access to good’s and service’s.

What about noise ordinances or zoning ordinances?

Yeah like the noise ordinance’s are really enforced anyway. Gbump Jbump Thbump and for zoning ordinances that is beneficial to business’s. to have a business in a business district or zone not only makes it convienent for you and I it benefit’s the business, lot’s of free advertising, location, location, location you’ve heard that I’m sure, the best location is in a business district and the goal of the cities zoneing for business is tax dollar’s the better they do the more tax dollar’s a city makes. I do like the pot hole’s to go away. But tell me what’s next people can’t smoke outside thier house because some one might walk by and not like it or maybe they’ll pass a law that you can’t even smoke inside your house either or by your logic no one will be able to fart because it might offend some one. You think it’s the cities business to tell you what to eat to? I don’t like meat so everyone should be vegan’s. Pfffft!

your argument null and void with me comrade like I said wether you like it or not the nanny ban’s are just the start of a socialist state.

From your arguments it sounds like you’d oppose the Americans with Disabilities Act as well. What about noise ordinances or zoning ordinances? Is America a socialist country because we tell private businesses what they are allowed to build and tell them what parts of town they are allowed to build it?

I never said, nor do I believe, that the government should control what people smoke.

Unlike Trans fats, smoking is a balancing of one person’s rights to inhale smoke against another person’s rights to breathe clean air.

I don’t smoke but I don’t think I should tell a private bussiness owner that he should not allow smoking in his establishment. If you don’t like to be around it don’t patronize his business instead of trying to control other’s bussiness’s to fulfill your own selfish need’s. If a bussiness owner want’s to have smoking and non smoking section then that is his choice not your’s to ban all smoking in his establishment. Tabacco is a legal substance in this country and it’s not your place to control what other’s do. I don’t drink either but I’m not advocating a ban on alchahol in all bussiness establishment’s. your argument null and void with me comrade like I said wether you like it or not the nanny ban’s are just the start of a socialist state.

But wether you like it or not the nanny ban’s are just the start of a socialist state.

Unlike Trans fats, smoking is a balancing of one person’s rights to inhale smoke against another person’s rights to breathe clean air.

I can see where water flouridation might be considered an unwarranted government intrusion into our lives, but a smoking ban is about managing contending rights among citizens in public spaces.

Could nanny statist Mike Bloomberg still enter the race? John Fund says…maybe: Maybe it’s the Cheez-Its talking…….

You’re kidding – right? Tabasco flavored? Sounds good but … well, I did just find out that there are 2 different brands …

No joke – they’re awesome.

http://www.myfoxkc.com/myfox/pages/News/Detail?contentId=5457614&version=1&locale=EN-US&layoutCode=VSTY&pageId=3.1.1

sorry. I guess Mr Silverman has more information than what’s posted on the nutrition section of Cheez-its own website.

Bloomberg was eating a snack-sized pack of Cheez-Its. It contains a half-gram of trans-fat (note the link comes straight from the Cheez-Its website you linked).

These packs are the ones you get from vending machines. The trans-fat is used to keep them tasty while they sit indefinitely in the machine.

ALSO, nutritional labeling guidelines allow any trans-fat content less than 0.5 grams per serving to be rounded down to 0 grams. So if the other Cheez-Its have 0.4 grams or 0.3 grams, guess what? They can label it as zero grams

Your (nanny-state) government at work.

I’m opposed to helmet laws and seat belt laws. I’m not crazy about speed limits, and often exceed them but recognize that the safety of others is involved.

I think people should be able to harm themselves with trans fats, cigarettes, and alcohol. I’m also opposed to the billions spent on the drug war, but most people are OK with paying taxes to have the government prevent that private behavior.

My preferred trans fat solution, and smoking solution, would be market-based and require signs to inform the consumer. People want to be healthier and businesses would probably move that way without the government.

That said, the trans fat ban isn’t my biggest concern about government excess.

All laws, to keep perspective on the power of the government and how it is being wielded against the citizen, should start with: We the government of the people, at the point of a gun and with threat of death, hereby ….

So let’s think about this now:

At the point of a gun at with the threat of death from the government, WE, The People:

Will wear a seat belt.
Will not offer for sale trans fats in NY
Will wear a helmet.
Will not smoke in restaurants.
Will not smoke in bars.
Will use CFL light bulbs.
Will use R-134 refrigerant.
Will use 10% ethanol blends in motor vehicles.
ETC.

Ultimately, the law enforcement arm of the government can KILL YOU if you refuse to follow these rules. It is absurd!!!! If you don’t wear your seat belt the state may kill you. If you don’t use CFL bulbs the state may kill you. If you sell transfats the state may kill you.

There are some laws necessary for the preservation of life, liberty and property of others in the community. Laws against murder, rape, robbery etc. are necessary. Laws against what kind of food I eat or have access to are not necessary and to be deprived my option at the point of a gun is offensive to me on many levels and offensive to the Constitution on all levels.